15:01:13 #startmeeting RDO meeting - 2017-03-15 15:01:13 Meeting started Wed Mar 15 15:01:13 2017 UTC. The chair is jpena. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:01:13 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 15:01:13 The meeting name has been set to 'rdo_meeting_-_2017-03-15' 15:01:14 Meeting started Wed Mar 15 15:01:13 2017 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is jpena. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:01:15 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 15:01:18 The meeting name has been set to 'rdo_meeting___2017_03_15' 15:01:22 #topic roll call 15:01:24 [sensu] NEW: master.monitoring.rdoproject.org - check-delorean-mitaka-current @ http://tinyurl.com/zsd5jkc |#| Build failure on centos7-mitaka/current: networking-bigswitch: http://trunk.rdoproject.org/centos7-mitaka/report.html 15:01:27 \o/ 15:02:05 #chair chandankumar 15:02:05 Current chairs: chandankumar jpena 15:02:06 Current chairs: chandankumar jpena 15:02:14 o/ 15:02:15 dmsimard: can you mute the openstack bot? 15:02:19 ʕ•ᴥ•ʔ 15:02:27 #chair jruzicka amoralej 15:02:27 Current chairs: amoralej chandankumar jpena jruzicka 15:02:28 Current chairs: amoralej chandankumar jpena jruzicka 15:02:39 well this is redundant. well this is redundant. 15:02:48 :) 15:03:03 o/ 15:03:12 #chair apevec 15:03:12 Current chairs: amoralej apevec chandankumar jpena jruzicka 15:03:13 which bot is serving us today? 15:03:13 Current chairs: amoralej apevec chandankumar jpena jruzicka 15:03:17 TWO! 15:03:31 \o 15:03:33 we need to decide which one to keep 15:03:48 remember, if you need to add any last minute topic to the agenda, do so at https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/RDO-Meeting 15:03:52 #chair dmsimard 15:03:53 Current chairs: amoralej apevec chandankumar dmsimard jpena jruzicka 15:03:58 apevec, we have better control over zodbot, no? 15:04:07 not realy 15:04:12 that's fedora infra bot 15:04:15 we probably have better control over openstack bot :p 15:04:16 oh 15:04:26 openstack bot it is then 15:04:32 we should register in openstack infra to have official rdo meeting 15:04:38 (illusion of) control is important 15:04:40 now it gets logged as ad-hoc 15:05:03 jruzicka, it is via openstack-infra lots-of-yamls repo 15:05:18 yup, that's OK I guess 15:05:32 control is just one git review away 15:05:32 is zodbot used for anything else? 15:05:40 karma 15:05:41 yes, sufficient :) 15:05:46 jschlueter++ 15:05:50 so... shall we start with the agenda? 15:05:52 whoowns 15:06:05 (looks up in fedora pkgdb) 15:06:09 yeah let's start 15:06:16 o/ 15:06:20 #chair rbowen 15:06:21 Current chairs: amoralej apevec chandankumar dmsimard jpena jruzicka rbowen 15:06:37 #topic As an FYI, we're adding new python-collectd-gnocchi package which requires opstools sig repo in rdo-release either for Ocata or PIke 15:06:48 o/ 15:06:49 who added this topic? ^^ 15:06:53 so it will not be FYI 15:06:59 we need some decision here 15:07:06 it was pradk 15:07:26 asking on IRC, then mrunge chimed in from opstools 15:07:37 o/ 15:07:41 collectd-gnocchi depends on collectd 15:07:49 suprisingly! 15:07:56 :) 15:07:57 lies! 15:08:01 and collectd is in opstools SIG repo 15:08:18 there was some circular dep repo issue i believe 15:08:21 so if we add collectd-gnocchi to RDO 15:08:30 we need to add repo dep to opstools repo 15:08:38 as opstools sig requires rdo back 15:08:39 but opstools depends already on RDO 15:08:51 b/c os osops-tools-monitoring-oscheck 15:08:58 which depends on all clients 15:09:13 so yeah it's circular dep which is bad 15:09:17 we can: 15:09:32 1) ad collectd-gnocchi to opstools SIG 15:09:54 but opstools is depending on RDO Newton while collectd-gnocchi needs Ocata 15:10:11 or 2) move oschecks to RDO 15:10:24 mrunge, ^ wdyt ? 15:10:39 I vote for 2) 15:10:57 everything else in opstools SIG is independed of Openstack afaict 15:11:31 apevec, but probably they have other packages that depends on oschecks?, so even if we add it to RDO, they still need to depend on RDO repo 15:11:51 yes, they could keep dep on RDO repo 15:12:03 it's about avoiding circular dep 15:12:19 osops-tools-monitoring is hosted in the OpenStack git, so it makes sense to move it to RDO 15:12:29 yep, that's also good point 15:12:56 pradk, anything else on this topic? 15:13:17 I can take action to talk to opstools SIG folks at their meeting and propose the move 15:13:17 apevec, and can we get this into ocata 15:13:31 or is it too late for that 15:13:32 pradk, deps wise yes, but man, you're late :) 15:13:34 we're fine with pike 15:13:41 agreed :) 15:13:58 no pressure, if we can get it into pike we're happy 15:14:09 oh yes, for 2) we need to add deps on opstools SIG 15:14:32 apevec: I don't get this ^^ 15:14:39 hmm, then we still have circular dep 15:14:55 jpena, I just found flaw in my proposal 15:14:59 damn 15:15:27 I don't see anything in osops-tools-monitoring-oschecks that depends on the osptools SIG repo 15:16:06 yeah, it's pretty independent collection of script afaict 15:16:23 so why would adding it require to add deps on opstools SIG? 15:16:47 no, it's back to original collectd-gnocchi plugin 15:16:55 ahh ok 15:16:56 which has runtime dep on collectd 15:17:22 ok, now I have it: 15:17:35 we oschecks moved, opstools can drop dep on RDO 15:17:46 that's how we avoid circular dep 15:18:00 * apevec needs afternoon green tea or coffee 15:18:02 o/ 15:18:12 alright, I'm recording action 15:18:26 opstools doesn't have other packages depending on oschecks? 15:18:30 #action apevec talk to opstools SIG folks at their meeting and propose the moving oschecks to RDO 15:18:41 if so they can't remove their dep on rdo 15:18:53 amoralej, I'll discuss that on their meeting 15:18:57 ok 15:19:23 anything else? 15:19:56 nope, next topic? 15:22:46 #topic Project creation process in review.rdoproject.org is now based on reviews in config repo 15:23:07 yes! Much goodies after SF upgrade 15:23:20 woohoo! 15:23:21 after yesterday's review.rdo upgrade to SoftwareFactory 2.3.0, we can now create projects using a Gerrit review \o/ 15:23:27 link or it didn't happen 15:23:33 #info first project created with new process https://review.rdoproject.org/r/#/c/5827/ 15:23:53 worked fine 15:23:59 excellent 15:24:14 now we need to decide how to organize the resources 15:24:16 kudos to fbo, tristanC and rest of SF team! 15:24:17 The migration script created a huge yaml file, and fbo proposed https://review.rdoproject.org/r/#/c/5818 with an initial refactor 15:25:15 jpena, that's only example covering part of it? 15:25:27 that, and https://review.rdoproject.org/r/#/c/5827/ 15:25:30 apevec, yes 15:25:54 in the comments there is some discussion about the best approach 15:26:03 we need to create a set of human-manageable files, so we are trying to discuss the best way to do it 15:26:15 hmm " included group have been discarded " ? 15:26:30 amoralej: are we using some kind of auto generated yaml template to create this rdo-infra-releng.yaml ? 15:26:30 so we can't use sub groups? 15:26:44 like we had "rdo-provenpackager" ? 15:26:55 not yet chandankumar, but the idea is to create a template once we decide how to do it 15:28:17 amoralej, what we need to decide? 15:28:42 creating a file for each package, for each type of resource, for project? 15:28:50 last proposal is one per-package 15:29:01 something like reno will work integrated with tox. 15:29:34 amoralej, what is package vs project vs resource type? 15:29:40 can you give an example? 15:30:15 per-package file, rdo-glance.yaml, rdo-glanceclient.yaml, maybe consolidate all puppet-* in a single rdo-puppet.yaml 15:30:27 per-type files, groups.yaml, acls.yaml, repos.yaml 15:30:36 per-project file, rdo-glance.yaml would containg glance, glanceclient and glance_store, i.e. 15:31:01 I kind of like last one 15:31:20 acl should be the same per-project right? 15:31:32 e.g. all neutron would have same core group 15:31:42 per-package is nice to have easy templates when adding new packages 15:31:49 we don't need to think where to put it 15:31:52 but per-package would be easier to automate 15:31:55 yeah 15:31:57 yeah 15:32:27 I prefer per-package because it requires less brain power to reuse 15:32:45 if you have to think were to put the new project, two different people can come up with different ideas 15:32:49 apevec, i like to per-package with exception for puppet that share tha same acls, afaik 15:32:52 s/were/where/ 15:33:06 jpena, +1 less.brain++ :) 15:33:42 alright, next question: how do we keep acls in sync w/ rdoinfo? 15:33:55 or can we now drop maintainers in rdoinfo? 15:34:02 to have single-source-of-truth 15:34:34 is acl info exported via SF API ? 15:34:38 DLRN uses the maintainers list in rdoinfo 15:35:18 jpena, right, so we need to keep it there 15:35:28 but then need to automate sync to acl 15:35:47 and declare rdoinfo is canonical source 15:35:59 not only for acl syncs, but even for new projects creation, so that new projects are automatically proposed when added to rdoinfo 15:36:08 right 15:36:16 do we know what's the status of RDO nodes in ci.centos.org? 15:36:42 * number80 sees " (pending—All nodes of label ‘rdo’ are offline) 15:37:04 amoralej: one question so for adding a new package in rdo, we need to send two reviews one with rdo-project.yml and updating rdo.yml? 15:37:09 number80, 5h ago eta on centos-devel was ~3h 15:37:23 number80, try pinging over there 15:37:40 ack, I thought this was finished 15:37:49 ok, let's try to summarize the discussion 15:37:54 chandankumar, no, it would be rdoinfo only 15:37:55 chandankumar, ideally only to rdoinfo and that would send a review to add rdo-project.yaml 15:38:04 then have automation syncing to SF config 15:38:36 1- We will have per-package yaml files in the config repo 15:38:50 2- rdoinfo will be the single source of truth for maintainers info 15:39:06 #agreed we will create per-package yaml files in the config repo 15:39:14 ^ even for puppet-*? 15:39:18 3- We will add automated tooling so, anytime a new package is created in rdoinfo, we get a config review to create the project 15:39:31 got that. 15:39:42 amoralej, puppet-* could be exception 15:39:47 amoralej: we will still have some default groups (rdo-superusers, rdo-provenpackagers, opm), so the automated tooling can work on that 15:40:08 yes 15:40:27 #agreed a single file rdo-puppet.yaml will be used for all puppet packages 15:40:43 the tooling will have to figure out the namespace for new packages, btw 15:40:58 #agreed rdoinfo will be the single source of truth for projects modifications and additions 15:41:14 jpena, we can add some logic in automation 15:41:24 e.g. default to openstack unless puppet-* 15:41:42 Merged config: Add rdo-infra/releng to zuul layout and replication https://review.rdoproject.org/r/5830 15:41:55 and since it's review, still can be amended 15:41:55 apevec: yes, that's what I was thinking about. Hopefully we won't add more complexity 15:42:30 jpena, luckily for us, bots are not smart enough and still need human supervision :) 15:43:47 ok, I think we're done with the topic. I'll work on the rdoinfo->config script 15:43:52 #agreed We will add automated tooling so, anytime a new package is created in rdoinfo, we get a config review to create the project 15:44:15 Merged openstack/neutron-lbaas-dashboard-distgit: Copy only new ngloadbalancersv2 panel https://review.rdoproject.org/r/5825 15:44:25 #action jpena will start working in the rdoinfo2config tool 15:44:43 next? 15:45:03 yeah 15:45:30 #topic (Announce) Test day schedule posted - https://www.rdoproject.org/testday/ Next one April 20 15:45:35 rbowen, the stage is yours 15:45:45 That's really the whole announcement 15:45:50 That I posted the test day schedule. :-) 15:46:05 I haven't put up the individual pages yet. Working on that. 15:46:05 and usual: please check test plan if you can 15:46:09 and update it 15:46:15 SO once those are up, help out with ... what apevec said. 15:46:33 one we're missing: test using upstream install manual 15:46:50 Yes. chandankumar mentioned that last week, and that's a great thing to add. 15:46:57 yeah it was proposed few times 15:47:11 let's make it real this time 15:47:29 apevec: is it possible to automate that also scrapping commands and config for doc book? 15:47:37 *from 15:47:45 Merged openstack/mistral-distgit: New release 4.0.0-2 https://review.rdoproject.org/r/5759 15:47:45 Merged openstack/kolla-distgit: Update to 4.0.0 https://review.rdoproject.org/r/5815 15:47:48 chandankumar, funny you meantion that, there is a tool 15:47:52 I think we also want to start emphasizing TripleO over Packstack on test days. 15:47:54 dmsimard, ^ what was the name? 15:47:57 rst2bash ? 15:48:04 uhhhhhhh 15:48:11 there's bash 2 rst 15:48:16 sphinx thing that oooq uses 15:48:28 rst2bash is the other way around, something that openstack docs uses 15:48:33 yeah that 15:48:44 chandankumar, ^ if you want to play with it :) 15:48:46 https://github.com/openstack/rst2bash 15:49:13 * chandankumar adding to todo list. 15:49:47 Who is going to add upstream docs testing to the test plan? 15:50:11 rbowen: i will take care of that. 15:50:22 ok. I was about to say "ok, I'll take it." :-) 15:50:35 #action chandankumar to add upstream docs testing to test day plan. 15:50:36 :) 15:51:04 Merged puppet/puppet-tripleo-distgit: Add dependency on puppet-qdr https://review.rdoproject.org/r/5831 15:52:14 great, so we're almost done 15:52:18 #topic chair for next meeting 15:52:23 Any volunteers? 15:53:29 i can do it 15:54:27 great! 15:54:34 #action amoralej to chair the next meeting 15:54:39 #topic open floor 15:54:52 anything else to discuss? 15:55:44 jpena: just few updates on tempest oooq 15:56:35 oooq-extras got the support of using tempest_version while running tempest for specific release https://review.openstack.org/444181 15:56:55 and one more thing 15:57:21 if we are using jinja templates anywhere in ci or code we can validate that also https://review.openstack.org/#/c/441599/ 15:57:40 that's it from myside. 15:58:36 Pradeep Kilambi created openstack/ceilometer-distgit: Fix ceilometer log permissions https://review.rdoproject.org/r/5832 15:59:14 [sensu] NEW: master.monitoring.rdoproject.org - check-delorean-master-head-current @ http://tinyurl.com/hcnq3ll |#| Build failure on centos7-master-head/current: nova, gnocchi, cliff, networking-bagpipe: http://trunk.rdoproject.org/centos7-master-head/report.html 15:59:34 so we're done! 15:59:37 #endmeeting